We Need To Talk About The New Ranger - Full Class + Spells Breakdown 

As much as it's in your name, I'd love to see you expand past D&D and see what kind of other TTRPGs you'd recommend or enjoy; Due to how they've treated the community and their employees, I'd like to steer clear of Wizards' products, and have no interest in the upcoming "Rules Update". That said, you're one of my favourite content creators in this space, as the way you like to have fun with your games matches a lot of what I like to do myself.

yeah but that be nice for the ranger so the one dev who hates Ramger will not let it happen

What if they had made a different type of concentration for Hunters Mark called Focus, which you don’t get if you multiclass and can stack with standard concentration?

Or maybe make it like favored foe where rangers specifically can hunters mark someone on hit and don’t need to concentrate. So pet subclass are actually usable with rangers.Big buff but it’s ranger and if other classes want that they need to multiclass to get the feature maybe lv 5 so it’s a big commitment.maybe even higher they can change targets when they die as a reaction.

@@AquiJuanin I don’t like rules that punish or disincentives multiclassing, but maybe allowing them to not concentrate on Hunter’s mark at a higher level like 7-ish would fix it. That way they have to take Ranger as their main class to be able to get it easily.

The reason for choosing to not do this was so it doesn’t stack with hex

They learned nothing from arcane archer which only increased damage of arcane shots at 18. Everyone told them that was dumb and yet now they've gone and done this. Its so stupid

@@kurtacus3581 I think almost none even remember Arcane Archer even exists tbh.

Or just be able to upcast it. Honestly, that simple change would be huge, especially for the capstone. That's a sizable damage boost later on, just cap it at like 3rd or 4th level so MCing doesn't get too excessive.

It feels like they looked at studied target from PF2e and wanted to make hunter's mark just like it but forgot to take notes on what makes ST good and HM a bad spell

@@Zecteiro I got excited when I first read the subclass name back in the day, then I read what it does and completely lost interest.

@@regeoberon3676 that's becuase ranger should rely on its magical power (AKA spells slots) to do more damage on its turns. However, I would have been in favor of removing Hunter's Mark from the spells and give it to the ranger as a feature, as you say, if the class realies completely on that spell.

​@@eliascabbio7598They already can use spell slots for extra damage and/or utility, it's called "using spells". This change actually allows them to do that sometimes.

Agreed. Just make it a class feature that doesn't require concentration, similar to Hexblade's Curse. That would have been so easy.

Thats too fun and makes too much sense 😠

they want to make everything spells now, which screws with action ecom, hence why all the classes seem bad.

Especially when it was considered shite last time around IN THE SAME EDITION.

Maintaining concentration to use its abilities would be fine, could even be great if it was for a primary spell caster - some bonus features you can only use on the spell you are concentrating on or while concentrating when you have lots of spells to choose from and spell slots would be great fun, and if that class gets neither armour or proficiency in con saves these features are likely to be a fun risk/reward balance and far from game breaking. But it is a flat out failure for the hunter, and doesn't fit the theme either...

"literally just a guy with a bow" who can turn invisible, can cast spells, have very powerful subclass abilities- non-concnetrationsl always-on greater invisibility, non-concentrational summon, resistance to all damage. Don't be dramatic, the "guy with a bow" is fine. Especially when only 0.1% plays at level 20, and for majority of play at level 1-6 it is easily top 3 class.

@@user-ni7ji3fb8m Except you have to choose between giving up half you class features to cast spells, or being restricted to Hunter’s Mark. Not fun, especially with all the bs with subclass features requiring your bonus action to use but your ranger class features also require your bonus action to use. That’s just frustrating to play, and bad game design

@@joshlewis8860 you are not giving up anything. Those features are ribbons- look at the 2014 paladin and ranger- they got nothing at level 13 and 17, those are the levels you got your 4th and 5th level spells. Rest is free bonus. Your class features are weapon masteries, fighting style and second attack from "martial-half" and half-casting with one of the best battlefield control spells in the game from druid-half. You don't "choosing" any of those, you got it all the time. At level 1-4 to have 2 extra first level spell to play with and move on with spell progression letter on. It is that simple. Ranger is one of the strongest classes in the game.

You do realise how potentially having +1d6 on every shot/swing from level 1 is extremely strong, right? That's just double damage for a shortbow or shortsword. There's so few lvl1 concentration spells and fewer worth casting, and even at base spell level it lasts long enough that you can get multiple encounters in without a recast. It is objectively a _very_ strong spell, especially in meaty single-target encounters. If it's not going to require concentration then _all_ the other effects should just be separated from the damage and it becomes purely an enabling condition that does not deal damage ( a la Bladesong). Perhaps they could create a new spell that has just the old damage effect and concentration requirement but does not interact with other abilities in any way. I do think it's funny that Ranger's core feature is more attractive to other classes as a dip than it is to most of Ranger's own subclasses.

@@graysaltine6035 I absolutely realize how strong it is… but that’s +2d6 a round compared to an upcast smite. And there’s still room for missing. I personally like Ranger. But the criticisms levied are just as valid. The upgrades should all happen 1 upgrade round sooner. As per your point… a Fighter would get the most out of Hunter’s Mark. Ranger seems to be headed in a direction of stacking damage from spells and effects. But it’s like Will says…. You can’t Haste and Hunter’s Mark at the same time. You’re stuck with depending on it without being able to cast Swift Quiver (+2 attacks from your bonus action, 5th lvl slot), summoning spells (unless you are a Fey Wanderer), Ashardalon’s Stride, Lightning Arrow, or or spike growth,or Zephyr Strike.

Like it’s insane, a level 13 wizards can cast a green ray from there finger that does 50-100 damage, a cleric can ask, and will have there god intervene on there behalf, paladins are practically gods, but a ranger at 13, you don’t have to concentrate to make your damage do an extra d6 worth of damage, like seriously you should be Legolas slaying an elephant levels at 13 instead you do 2 more damage then an unarmed strike

@@graysaltine6035 Its not double damage. A longbow is going to do 1d8+3 for an average early game ranger, so average 7 damage. Hunters Mark adds average 3 damage, so a 42% increase, even less once you get more than 16 dex and start getting magic bows.

@@2MeterLP Feels like you're deliberately misinterpreting what I said - obviously it's not literally doubling the damage of your hit that would be stupid, but a d6 rider on every hit for nothing but a bonus action and a conc slot you weren't using is objectively good, and getting it for a one-level dip is even better. Unless you're starting a campaign at level10+ or your DM hands out magical starter gear like candy, it's hard to get that much impactful damage on every hit at low level without Feats that drastically lower your attack (which are also good but they "need" advantage to be reliable and they stack with HM so why not both) and are also stopping you from hitting 18 in your primary stat by picking them (dipping just delays your increase, Feats replace it forever :p). Besides, you make it sound like more damage stops being good at some point...? Again this is value on every attack, it's not really made worse by having a magic bow. If you found a Longbow in your campaign at level5 that did 1-8 + 1d6 pierce +1d4 fire instead of just base + fire, you'd think that was a pretty fucking sweet bow. So many riders are either conditional or once-per-turn whereas HM just gains value with more attacks. Also I get damage averages are a thing, especially when talking about a rider for every hit in the encounter, but a d6 isn't exactly the same as +3.5 - we run lethal criticals at our table (crits always roll max damage - goes both ways) so there's some better value there when it's always a 6. Really feels like people are shitting on Hunter's Mark because they are salty about Ranger. HM is good, it's not HM's fault that the Ranger milestones and capstone suck dick. There is no good way to remove concentration without nerfing the damage and ruining the ability, so just don't make it so inexorably tied to Ranger's gameplay - problem solved.

Thats the part thats confusing the had a specific design goal for one class but the exact opposite for the other

Ya, I am tossing that idiotic concept. I will likely use the 2024 chassis, but I am definitely giving my players the option to use older features where the new one was nerfed. So Paladins will get to have regular smite, same with Wild shape, Conjure, shape changing spells....these nerfs are dumb, and now I will be making a new Ranger specific Hunters Mark spell that will : 1. Eliminate concentration. 2. Scale damage, +1d6 at levels 5, 9, 13 and 17 3. At higher level, you cast it and can apply the target effect to more than one enemy OR the bonus to more than one ally. That makes this CORE feature of the Ranger actually useful.

​@@shadowmancer99The conjure nerf is NOT dumb

@@shadow-faye Totally disagree. So in the interest of NOT getting this to be a flame war, I will leave it at that. If you prefer it, fine, but its not necessary and was better the way it was....they wanted to give spirit guardians they should have just done that...still dumb, but more honest.

​@@shadow-faye I loved the new conjure spells, the new summon options are way easier to use and not overpowered like conjure animals used to be

@@shadowmancer99 I was thinking something similar to your ideas with the Ranger as well. I think all of your ideas for the classes are good. Really all it comes down to is if the players and the DM are on the same page. Thanks for sharing your suggestions.

Hunter's mark also needs to be better than any of the 2nd level or higher spells, too; at least with the upgrades.

The over focus then making it absolutly fucking useful

You do get more free hunters marks as you level up, 6 I think.

This “focus” isn’t really relevant until lvl 14, so I wouldn’t even care about it that much. But alas, I’m not sure why would I want to progress ranger past lvl 9 at most.

If it dropped concentration at like level 7. And at level 20 instead of 1d10 u gave vulnnerability to like one dmg type on hunters marked target . I feel everyone be happy

hell, it seems they mixed the HUNTER with the RANGER. It's not RANGER'S mark, some rangers dont want it. Or, at least, dont want to want it.

Agreed. It would have been great with the Hunter subclass.

It should just have been a ability like Hexblade curse. No Concentration, no Bonus Action, just upgradable Dueling enhancement for a class would be good (Also suddenly a Hexblade Ranger multiclass would be great. Super Hunters mark+hex+Curse=insane Single target damage)

While I also think they're going to remove concentration from the ranger "Smite" spells like they did with paladin smite spells, I also don't think there's really enough of them. You've got... - Ensnaring Strike. - Lightning Arrow. - Hail of Thorns. - Maybe Zephyr Strike and/ or Ashardalon's Stride if you squint real hard. - Not counting the Smite spells they get since they're not really "ranger smites." I doubt they'll remove concentration from Stride or Zephyr Strike for balance reasons, so even if you were to count them that leaves only 3 spells that function like Smite spells. Even if all of the spells had concentration removed, I don't think that'll be enough to make a difference.

@Reapor234 you're probably right, but they keep saying they're adding new spells so we can hope that includes the Ranger.

My solution: move Hunter's Mark as part of an attack at level 5, no concentration for HM at level 13th (substitutes the actual feature). Easy peasy

This is just centering even more of the Ranger's features around a 1st level spell, no?

​@@GlacialScion My idea was more that the class is already hugely designed around HM in such a way that it detracts from the Ranger's other spells and abilities. By opening up their bonus action and allowing them to duel concentrate that helps give them more opportunities to use other spells and abilities. And then making HM stay up until they die helps ensure that the ranger doesn't lose out on all the bonuses that are now stacked onto HM and that they won't have to recast it if they're knocked down, which really isn't that crazy but feels like a better capstone then a d10 instead of a d6. My goal with these changes is that they can easily slot into the existing ranger design without having to completely redesign the class. For better or worse the designers decided to build the entire ranger and it's subclasses around HM, so instead of fighting against HM I wanted to instead focus on making HM more flexible to use and thusly make Rangers more flexible to build.

​@@eliascabbio7598I like your level 5 ability, but I think it's important to keep language about HM contraction specific but not remove it entirely.

Or maybe give them another attack? Rather than the typical 2. Make it 3.

Suggestions: Hunter's Mark doesn't require concentration when cast for free as a Ranger, but you can only have one at a time. Make Favored Terrain more appealing. Free Hunter's Marks in your terrain, advantage (On top of the doubled proficiency) to Intelligence and Wisdom checks related to your terrain, most beasts in the terrain are neutral if not friendly (Unless provoked or they have a reason to be hostile, IE, frightened, injured by other humanoids) Don't make a ranger choose between Natural Explorer and Deft Explorer, give both, since Natural Explorer is much more situational. Favored Enemy should grant free uses of Hunter's Marks, something like Danger Sense, if you can see the enemy and you're aware of it, and it tries something, you get an advantage on the save so long as it's your favored enemy and you're marking it. Overall it should feel like you're an all around good character, with specialized targets and terrain you can really shine uniquely as a Ranger with.

This class has been completely destroyed and flattened out, its spirit completely shut and stepped on. They removed alle the unique skills, making it some sort of mosaic of skills, similar to others but never original, and its usefullness and expertise completely forgotten and restrained by these strange compelling rules. This class deserved better.

​@@katlicksI think that the way Favoured Terrain works in BG3 works well as a fix: just scrap the entire idea of you getting bonuses while in your terrain entirely, and instead give permanent bonuses that would be appropriate for the terrain in question. Your favoured terrain is forest? That probably means you're good at hunting and gathering, have a permanent advantage to Survival and Perception checks. Your favoured terrain is desert? You must be used to the heat, have fire resistance. Mountains? You're very fit and great at climbing and movement in general, have +5ft to movement and advantage on Athletics. Alternatively, the fixes from Tasha's (one expertise of your choice, faster movement and better stamina) should be fine, just label them as one feature they were always supposed to be and add more features in other parts of the kit to make up for this removal.

@@HunterTracks I haven't played BG3 but that sounds like a great and unique system to at the very least start to work with

Or make it able to be upcast. Or give rangers more spells that are not concentration.

It wouldve been ok if they just removed concentration at later levels

​@@iampineappleonpizzaeven then, all the features that upgrade HM are either too late and/or don't add enough. You have to been sniffing some of that old lead paint to forget letting melee Rangers not get some way to maintain their HM until level 13, the advantage at 17 can be irrelevant depending on your build, and the capstone is self-explanatory. It really feels like the changes were last minute additions after the December job cuts

Hunter’s Mark is not even a remotely bad spell, but it is very stupid to base the entire class around it. If they had made it so you gain additional effects when you hit a marked creature, like the Warlock does with Eldritch Blast, that would be a little better. But basing ANY class off of a single spell is just bad design.

​@@astercat49It's kind of a bad trap after level 5, most 2nd level spells are way better to concentrate on

Funny thing is, they did make another subclass in the game that's heavily incentivized to concentrate on a bonus action 1st level damage spell even into much higher levels, but for that one it's way more interesting and satisfying to use. The redesign of Great Old One Warlock gets a lot of incentives to concentrate on Hex. From level 3, they can cast Enchantment or Illusion spells (including Hex) without verbal or somatic components, so they can Hex targets before the target realizes what's happening, and they can change the damage type of their spells to Psychic, meaning they can get around Necrotic-resistant enemies. Then at level 10, their Hex also debuffs the saving throws for the chosen ability, meaning they can debuff an enemy then follow up with a devastating save-or-suck spell, or they can set up their party members to start hammering that ability score with their own spells and abilities. I imagine Monks in particular would love being in a party with a Great Old One Warlock debuffing the BBEG's Constitution. Then at 14, they can cast Summon Aberration and reduce the duration in exchange for not requiring concentration for it, so they can have both the Aberration and Hex up at the same time, and the Aberration deals extra damage to the Hex target. If they want Hunter's Mark to be a core part of Ranger throughout the game, they need to take a page from the playbook of whoever designed the new Great Old One and start introducing the buffs much earlier and make the buffs that come online at higher level much more powerful.

In UA 6, there's a line that says "You can also sacrifice one of your attacks when you take the Attack action to command the beast to take the Attack action." You can still use your bonus action to issue the attack command and you have to use your bons action if you want the companion to do anything else (except for Dodge, which it will to if you give it no commands). If this made it into the final version, then it will help with the bonus action issue.

Did not know that but it has the issue of the beastmaster where you feel more like a pokemon trainer rather than a man with his beast fighting side by side.

@@williamgordon5443 That just playing sub-optimally for better RP, unless your beast has it multi attack feature your attack with hunter mark is gonna do way more damage and is way more likely to hit.

That's absolutely how I'm going to rule it at my table. F that noise.

Still an issue with bonus action economy, especially for the beastmaster. It should be an entirely different thing from hunter's mark, something that could be applied freely and didn't take up concentration

Now you won't need to because the Ranger gets Weapon Mastery Nick

Beast master will have the same problem though

Maybe they'll do like a paladin and make some of the shot spells non-concentration, but I'm not holding my breath...

Agreed. especially since something similar already exists with the vengange paladin's mark of enmity.

Yeah that would have been way better. I've never been a fan of the Ranger anyway, it's just conceptually too much, which is why it's bad at everything. It tries to be a fighter a rogue and a druid at the same time, and it kinda has to miss all 3 or be practically broken. It can't be as good a fighter as the fighter, or it's just plain OP, it can't be as good of a rogue or druid for the same reason either. But so heavily relying on a spell that requires concentration does very heavily hinder the entire class. Not just mechanically, but also conceptually. With the 2014 paladin they chose to go the broken way, and make it an effective fighter while having tons of cleric abilities as well (particularly since most people have way less fights that matter per long rest than the game design anticipated), with the ranger they at least didn't do that. But honestly I've always felt the ranger should just be a rogue subclass rather than class. And I much prefer the rogue scout over any ranger for that reason alone. If I want to play a ranger conceptually I'd honestly just play a rogue scout with some druid levels.

They should have stuck with Favored Foe from Tasha's. It was less damage and only lasted 1 minute. All it needed was to have concentration removed and say it doesn't stack with hunter's mark, but will overlap with it. It could have the always advantage at 17th level quite easily.

@jaspermooren5883 I'm not gonna lie with you. I was going to make my ranger in a campaign a Ranger Beast Master/ Rogue Scout to make it strong and more flavourful.

Unless it changed massively that is not what it said.

It's really not, and the complaints are over blown

@@cookie8162 it really is. almost all of ranger's biggest strong points and utilities have been nerfed by other factors in the playtest. surprise being massively nerfed, conjure spells being entirely reworked, subclassing at 3 significant nerfs lifeberries, gloomstalker got big nerfs, etc although everything they changed in that list was very unhealthy for the game, that doesn't change the fact that ranger is weaker, and all it got in compensation were VERY late, mediocre buffs to a first level concentration spell. multiple of the 2014 features were also nerfed or straight up removed, and the emphasis on wisdom modifier instead of proficiency on things makes the class a bit more MAD as well

@@cookie8162 20th level feature is garbage; I don’t think I need to argue that one. The 14th lvl ability to become invisible until the end of your next turn as a bonus action used to be Nature’s Veil. It was 10th lvl (4 levels earlier if you’re not following), and it was invisibility until the start of your next turn. However the number of times you could use it was tied to your proficiency bonus, not your WIS. At 10th lvl that gives you 4 uses of it. Even at lvl 14 I’d be surprised if a Ranger had more than +2 to their WIS. The feature where they get temp HP as an action used to be 1d8 + WIS a number of times = to your proficiency. Same problem as the invisibility feature. Your PB is probably gonna be higher than your WIS, unless you make your Ranger worse on purpose. If you don’t see that the 13th lvl feature to not make concentration checks due to damage on Hunter’s Mark ONLY isn’t a joke then I can’t help you. It doesn’t stop you from losing concentration from being paralyzed/ incapacitated, and those things can be pretty common around that level; happened to my character at a game last night. 17th level of gaining advantage on the target that’s marked is okay, but it comes online too late. Oh and don’t forget, some of the subclass features are tied to Hunter’s Mark as well, so you’re basically ALWAYS punished for not using it. Don’t forget Tasha’s also had Favoured Foe, which was a d4 extra damage on one attack per round (d6 then d8 at higher levels), could be applied on a hit at no extra cost, and could be done a number of times per long rest = to your PB. The only thing that sucks about it is it can’t be transferred as a bonus action. Why couldn’t they just have made this Hunter’s Mark and non-concentration? The only things that are an actual improvement when compared to the Tasha’s Ranger are getting a movement speed increase at lvl 6 of +10 instead of +5, and gaining 3 expertise skills instead of 1. Also the spellcasting being more flexible in that they allow you to prepare 1 different spell on a rest. Now explain to me how this isn’t markedly WORSE than the Tasha’s Ranger.

It's better than tashas in every way... like nothing is worse.

@@gloryrod86 nah dawg go re-read the optional Tasha’s features; you’re straight up wrong 😂 I listed most of the differences pretty neatly above for your convenience 😂

Till lvl 5 ranger has only ONE attack

Let's just hope that this change actually made it into the final version.

I am sure the beastmaster will be happy about that when they reach lvl 5 until then if you want to cast HM on turn 1 you will then have the issue should you act and use the HM you just casted or do you want to use the pet you got your subclass for

@@booklover4078 as a ranged beast master this will suck a fair bit but you could play a Nick weapon mastery beast master and sacrifice your Nick property attack instead; it said an attack it didn’t say you couldn’t use the additional attack granted by Nick. If you look at the class holistically… a lot of the defaults make two weapon fighting really good for the class; it seems like the ranger is being sort of pigeonholed into being the quintessential dual wielder (a la Drizzt)

@malcolmb2019 having just looked over the UA version of nick and the light property I really don't think so

@@Feanor6450 that was level 20 foe slayer, your add wis to atk or dmg, your choice

@@eliascabbio7598 nah I'm saying add it to both, from level 14 as a core ranger feature. That alone would make it good.

@@Feanor6450 you're right, maybe just at level 13 to substitute the actual class feature, which is super meh. We could also implement it into the spell upcasting mechanism, but it could be accessed by other classes easily, considering HM being a 1st level spell

@@eliascabbio7598 make it only for ranger spells then, that should prevent multiclassing shenanigans.

@@Feanor6450 sure, still I think that wis to attacks and damage is the only cool thing I've seen for Level 20, so I wouldn't waste it on lower levels. Concentration on Hunter's Mark is the most painful thing right now, so just make it not require concentration (allowing in this way to cast stuff on top of it) at level 13 would be enough to fix it, maybe even at level 9. Rangers have a very flat damage curve after level 5, so I think big damage boost shouldn't come too early, and not too late.

Nice. My group uses Dungeon Coach's alternate ranger. and it's been such a blast.

That is why when i tried to play beast master I was annoyed because the player handbook one was trash and weak, while the tasha one was too magical and flavorless. I tried hard to find a balance between them without making it too powerful or too weak.

I know very little about Beast Masters, but just off the name, I would presume most of their strength lies within their animal companions. Not letting the "Beast Master" have beasts doesn't sound fun at all, and a spirit just isn't as cool imo.

You can flavor it however you like.

​@@pixels_per_minutenot to mention your beasts cannot have a CR above 1/2, which is stupid. If a player is going the beast master route, the CR should increase to 1 at taking this subclass and increases by 1 like every 3 or 4 levels

​@@pixels_per_minutenot to mention your beasts cannot have a CR above 1/2, which is stupid. If a player is going the beast master route, the CR should increase to 1 at taking this subclass and increases by 1 like every 3 or 4 levels

That would be one way to do it, but then ranger would kind of suck at anything that isn't a bbeg... or chew through spell slots like crazy. I've been playtesting a ''Predator's Mark'' class feature. Any creature you've hit with an attack is hunter's marked for +1d6, and you can only have one active mark at a time. Gained at level 3. It's really not broken. Stops people from level dipping. Level 12 could be that whatever is marked can be tracked and sensed even if it turns invisible. Level 17 gives you a supernatural awareness of where that creature is, even across planes. You can also have 2 active marks (you choose which one gets erased when a new one is applied.) At level 20, you can have an unlimited number of active marks at a time.

@@almisami don't forget the free castings gained.

Yep. They turned their focus to making nearly every subclass magical, psychic, or linked to the feywild. Takes away the uniqueness of each class imo.

That would make multiclass into hunter too strong. However, having it apply as a reaction when making an attack (like 5.5 paladin smite does after a hit) would free up your bonus action so that beast master isn't gimped.

@@almisami not really. Multiclass paladin, fighter would still reign supreme

@@almisami spores druid has the exact same thing, just only melee

I like the idea of remove concentration (maybe have it as a mid level thing to remove it since there was feedback it was too strong at early levels in testing) but I like that part overall. Dont agree on the damage though, having an ability that mimics a rare quality item in damage profile for a level 1 spell slot (or less with the few free ones per day) is too strong.

Do you have even the slightest idea how bad they would be if they weren't?

They pretty much always have been

Give each subclass unique abilities with a certain number of uses instead of relying on spells and concentration. Or make hunters mark a non-concentration spell. Either or both options would greatly increase ranger playability in game.

Because they have always been a half/third caster

The newest version of the UA had Hunter’s Mark deal force damage, so it’s basically not going to be resisted. We also don’t know exactly how it’s going to work mechanically. Maybe you can move it as part of an attack. Maybe they changed spells like Hail of Thorns and Ensnaring Strike to no longer require concentration and they stack with HM. Who knows. I’m not holding my breath, but I’m also not ready to declare the Ranger non-viable.

DnD Pants

They were the worst class in the game until Tasha's lol

@@Squiiiddmonk

@@Squiiidd can you seriously say that the class that got thorn growth, conjure animals, and other druid spells, not to mention GLOOMSTALKER was not good, while the MARTIAL class that can only attack once/turn (rogue) was?

@@ShadestheMothman Monk isn't really that bad if you give them a crossbow/gun.

@@skeepodoop5197 but ranger is still worse?

Yes, but the barbarian doesn't have that many other options, and he can rage and have a lot of useful features, more importantly, he doesn't have to concentrate while in rage, he is too stupid to do that

Conjure Woodland Beings would allow you to Concentrate on that plus Hunter's Mark for a total of 3d10 + 5d8 extra damage a round assuming the UA goes through

@@williambradford6575 I don't remember exactly what was in the UA about Conjure Woodland Beings, but was there something about it allowing concentration on 2 spells? but also, Hunter's Mark is 1d6, so I'm a little confused how your total damage calculation is a combination of d10's and d8's

I mean they could have given them amazing spells we have no idea

@@barcster2003 yeah, they could turn out to be really good, we just don't know yet. Off of what we've been given they don't look great but we just don't have the whole picture yet

Funny thing about the expectation that spellcasting will carry them through the nerfs, particularly with Paladin, is that the changes buff multiclassing out of Paladin even more. Sorcadins will be able to drop bigger smites sooner, more frequently, and more reliably than single-class Paladins. Partly because they get those higher level slots faster, so if Limited Magical Immunity is still a thing moving forward then Sorcadins can smite enemies that a single-class Paladin can not. Partly because with Divine Smite becoming a spell Sorcadins can apply Metamagic to them. Particularly Subtle Spell, which will allow the Sorcadin to smite when affected by the Silence spell and protect their critical hit smites from potential Counterspells, while the straight-class Paladin has no way to protect their smites from anti-magic counter-tactics at all. And with the changes to Find Steed, the Sorcadin's steed becomes more powerful much faster for much the same reason. Single-class Paladins don't get high enough spell slots to upcast Find Steed to get a flying mount until level 13. Sorcadins can do it as early as level 9. When the Paladin is finally able to summon a flying steed, the Sorcadin will be able to do it with a spell slot 1-2 levels higher, meaning the Sorcadin's steed has higher AC, more HP, and deals slightly more damage. (a 13th level Paladin can summon a flying steed with 14 AC and 45 HP, while Paladin 5/Sorcerer 8 can summon one with 16 AC and 65 HP)

Beast's Quarry: "At 3rd level, when you cast Hunter's Mark on a creature your Primal Companion senses this and knows to act. Whenever you don't issue a command to your Primal Companion with your Bonus Action, they will move up to their speed and make an attack against the creature under the effects of your Hunter's Mark rather than taking the Dodge action." A bit wordy, but I think that gets the point across.